There’s nothing in the NCEPT SOP that restricts anyone’s release eligibility.Tell that to the 9 people who had release dates when I showed up at my first facility, as compared to the 0 that were allowed to leave after NCEPT
There’s nothing in the NCEPT SOP that restricts anyone’s release eligibility.Tell that to the 9 people who had release dates when I showed up at my first facility, as compared to the 0 that were allowed to leave after NCEPT
Train better.Tell that to the 9 people who had release dates when I showed up at my first facility, as compared to the 0 that were allowed to leave after NCEPT
That was with at least 10 more CPCs than the facility had ever historically run with. But whatever, I get it. You want to be right so I’ll tell you you’re right! Good job!Train better.
Got it, NCEPT is great, no flaws, numbers aren’t skewed. When you take a facility that would run with 14-15 and let people go all the time plus still get new people all the time and NCEPT goes ahead and makes their number to be able to release a single person 23, that’s not broken right? Because guess what, for three years people were tripping over each other because staffing was so fat, yet still somehow not good enough to release even a single person. And guess what, 3 years down the line when one single person got their release, they were too well staffed to get anybody new into the facility. But I get it, I’m wrong, NCEPT is perfect and infallibleThere’s nothing in the NCEPT SOP that restricts anyone’s release eligibility.
I think the quote you quoted needs to be fixed.Got it, NCEPT is great, no flaws, numbers aren’t skewed. When you take a facility that would run with 14-15 and let people go all the time plus still get new people all the time and NCEPT goes ahead and makes their number to be able to release a single person 23, that’s not broken right? Because guess what, for three years people were tripping over each other because staffing was so fat, yet still somehow not good enough to release even a single person. And guess what, 3 years down the line when one single person got their release, they were too well staffed to get anybody new into the facility. But I get it, I’m wrong, NCEPT is perfect and infallible
What he means is that 9 people had release dates prior to NCEPT, even if they were two years away, but since NCEPT no new person has ever been eligible to leave at all since.There’s nothing in the NCEPT SOP that restricts anyone’s release eligibility.
That’s because of the National Release Policy MOU not NCEPTWhat he means is that 9 people had release dates prior to NCEPT, even if they were two years away, but since NCEPT no new person has ever been eligible to leave at all since.
N90 is not a part of NCEPT. N90 is staffed via MPP on usajobs and they’ve tried some targeted new hire bids.I think the quote you quoted needs to be fixed.
There's nothing wrong with the ncept sop,
If you're trying to get n90
In all seriousness I can do the ncept numbers if someone explains the process to me in a bit more detail. You can go from a higher to a lower number right? So we can also use the cwp and estimate the actual percentage of controllers that can transfer
Exactly. I think most of us can agree that the NCEPT process is pretty good. Just not the arbitrary staffing numbers they come up with.That’s because of the National Release Policy MOU not NCEPT
how about they address swaps first regardless of staffing since its body for body, then fill the rest with ncept. that way those few people who want to go "Home" to some lower level somewhere might actually have the opportunity.Exactly. I think most of us can agree that the NCEPT process is pretty good. Just not the arbitrary staffing numbers they come up with.
I definitely love that they meet every quarter or whatever at the time and do movements throughout the NAS. Instead of “When is IAH gonna pull another ERR list?” Etc. You know how many they get and with FOIA you can request the lists and see who applied and how they ranked.
There should be some lower criteria for a swap I think since they are receiving a body in exchange. Maybe they can let one person go earlier to account for longer training times etc.
They should let trainees that haven’t even started training swap no questions asked. The more people you can remove from need to put in transfer in the future makes it better for everyone else.how about they address swaps first regardless of staffing since its body for body, then fill the rest with ncept. that way those few people who want to go "Home" to some lower level somewhere might actually have the opportunity.
That makes too much sense, so it obviously won’t happen.how about they address swaps first regardless of staffing since its body for body, then fill the rest with ncept. that way those few people who want to go "Home" to some lower level somewhere might actually have the opportunity.
The Agency doesn’t view swaps as a zero sum trade they view them as 2 CPC losses. Also currently you have many swaps killed by an ERR and if you did them first you’d have many ERRs killed by a swap. Pros and cons.how about they address swaps first regardless of staffing since its body for body, then fill the rest with ncept. that way those few people who want to go "Home" to some lower level somewhere might actually have the opportunity.
Keyword: wasI think it’s time this forum came back to the top of the page. Don’t worry though, you’re getting a 5% raise even though CPI was at or above that from May 2021 to March of 2023.
Oh it’s getting resigned. This is the information they are spreading at the regional meetings. You are all getting swindled.Santa being in support of the slate book extension is basically the same as signing it. Therfore contradicting what he was implying in his last video.
Oh it’s getting resigned. This is the information they are spreading at the regional meetings. You are all getting swindled.
My point is our raises haven’t kept pace with inflation since the extension was signed and we deserve more money than we’re being paid. Nothing more than that. Inflation peaked at 9%, and our last federal raise was 4.6%. We have lost purchasing power the last two years.Keyword: was
The CPI is below what the raise is. By that logic the federal raise should be lowered to CPI levels. That would help stave off any future inflation right?
Why the fuck would I lie about it?You heard it here folks. Boots has inside info. Is it true? No. But let's run with it!